In the USA there was a circuit split on this in 2020 at least [1]. In the European union this form of copying is explicitly excepted in general under Directive 2001/29/EC Article 5(1) see [2]. Specifically in Germany (where LAION is established) it is permitted under Section 44a of the UrhG [3] . One could also argue based on Section 44b of same.

[1] https://lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/53/5/notes/files/53... with thanks to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35713309

[2] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX...

[3] https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_urhg/englisch_ur...

I am sorry but I have a very different reading of the mentioned EC Directive:

"""Article 5

Exceptions and limitations

1. Temporary acts of reproduction referred to in Article 2, which are transient or incidental [and] an integral and essential part of a technological process and whose sole purpose is to enable:

(a) a transmission in a network between third parties by an intermediary, or

(b) a lawful use of a work or other subject-matter to be made, and which have no independent economic significance, shall be exempted from the reproduction right provided for in Article 2. """

As upload to a GAN is not transmission, and the economic significance is pretty clear.

Then the German 44a is an exact copy of the EC directive, so this also applies I think.

I haven't heard the phrasing "Upload to a GAN" before. It also doesn't seem to be defined in the sources at hand. Can you provide a source and/or definition?

This is original research.

As the word "train" refers to applying the uniquely human capability of acquiring information, the word "upload" seems the most appropriate term fallback to use when referring to putting information into some AI system.

You're welcome!

Reference: open any dictionary and look up the word "train". Choo choo!

Note that "training" is a pretty common established term-of-art used in AI and ML for particular kinds of operations. Re-using the term "upload" on the spot would be misleading.

However, I get the impression you're feeling somewhat frustrated right this moment. Not a problem. Would you like to come back later and edit your post? If you do (and/or reply to this), I'll reply in more detail and provide sources where possible.

>As the word "train" refers to applying the uniquely human capability of acquiring information,

Dogs are trained to do certain things, are dogs humans?

Sorry, the dictionary definition for the verb "train" is that indeed it applies to humans, and animals. (and nothing else)

I think the argument is that it’s not the kind of copy that is copyright infringement.

In the sense that yes, the bits are copied from one register to another. But they aren’t stored permanently, nor are they distributed. So there’s no copyright violation.

Similarly my brain is making copies when I look at something. And routers on the internet make many copies sending the material to me. Etc etc.

If training on an image is copyright infringement for making copies, then so is viewing the image through glasses (image is transformed by the lens) or dragging the image from one monitor to another or caching the image in your browser and viewing it later from the cache rather than retrieving it again.